Nagesh Internationalization of Indian Enterprises

8/10/2019 Nagesh Internationalization of Indian Enterprises

1/21

doi: 10.1111/j.1748-3131.2008.00109.x Asian Economic Policy Review (2008) 3, 242261

2008 The Author242 Journal Compilation 2008 Japan Center for Economic Research

BlackwellPublishingL tdOxford,UKAEPRAsianEconomicPolicy Review1832-81051748-31312008TheAuthorsJournalCompilation 2008JapanCenter forEconomic ResearchXXXOriginalArticleXXXXXXNageshKumar

Internationalization of Indian Enterprises:

Patterns, Strategies, Ownership Advantages,

and Implications*

Nagesh KUMAR

Research and Information System for Developing Countries

The recent spate of large cross-border acquisitions for example, Tata SteelCorus, Hindalco

Novelis, and Tata MotorsJaguar/Land Rover and greenfield investments by Indian companies have

helped in focusing attention on the emergence of new corporate players on the global scene. Indias emergence

as a source of foreign direct investment outflows is impressive for its level of development. It is argued

that the destinations, sectoral composition, motivations, and entry strategies of Indian investments have

been changing with magnitudes. This paper examines the sources of Indian companies ownership

advantages and trends, patterns, and implications. It has been argued that the source of their

ownership or competitive advantage lies in their accumulation of skills for managing large multilocation

operations across diverse cultures in India and in their ability to deliver value for money with their

frugal engineering skills honed up while catering to the larger part of income pyramid in India.

Key words

acquisitions by Indian companies, emerging multinationals, India, Indian

multinationals, internationalization of Indian companies, outward investment, ownership

advantages of Indian multinationals

JEL codes

F21, F23

1. Introduction

The recent spate of large cross-border acquisitions (e.g. Tata SteelCorus, Hindalco

Novelis, and Tata MotorsJaguar/Land Rover, among others) and greenfield investments

by Indian companies have helped in focusing attention on the emergence of new corporate

players on the global scene. Rising numbers and magnitudes of outward investments by

Indian companies have made it an important and perhaps more dynamic aspect of

increasing global economic integration of the Indian economy along with trade in goods

and services and inward foreign direct investment (FDI). Indias emergence as a source of

*An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Sixth Asian Economic Policy Review Confer-

ence on New India, held in Tokyo on April 19, 2008. A version was also presented at the United

Nations UniversityMaastricht Economic Research Institute on Technology, Maastricht, on 13 June

2008. It has benefited from comments of Eisuke Sakakibara, Shujiro Urata, Isher Ahluwalia, Taka-

toshi Ito, Hadi Soesastro, Makoto Kojima, Hal Hill, Marcus Noland, Chalongphob Sussangkarn,

Jung-Hwa Lee, Mohamed Ariff, Chia Siow Yue, Hideki Esho, Colin McKenzie, Luc Soete, Suma Ath-

reya, and Rene Belderbos. However, the usual disclaimer applies.

Correspondence: Nagesh Kumar, Director-General, Research and Information System for

Developing Countries, Core 4B India Habitat Centre, Lodi Road, New Delhi 110003, India. Email:

[email protected]


2/21

Nagesh Kumar

Internationalization of Indian Enterprises

2008 The Author

Journal Compilation 2008 Japan Center for Economic Research

243

FDI outflows is impressive for its level of development. It is argued that the destinations,

sectoral composition, motivations, and entry strategies of Indian investments have been

changing with magnitudes. Some of the recent acquisitions included Indian companies

targeting much larger companies based in developed countries. What have been the

motivations of Indian companies strategies to invest abroad and how have they changed

over time? While leveraged buyouts enable financing of such deals, the ability to find

financial resources is generally not enough for such investments. The theory of

internationalization of firms makes outward investments conditional upon ownership of

some firm-specific intangible assets that have revenue productivity abroad or provide

some leverage to their owners. What are the sources of Indian companies ownership

advantages? What are the emerging patterns in the outward investments by Indian

enterprises in a global comparative perspective and their implications for the enterprises

and the home economy? These are some questions that this paper attempts to explore.

2. Outward FDI Policy and Trends in Indian Outward FDI

2.1 Evolution of outward FDI policy

The early policy of the Indian government toward outward FDI in force during the 1970s

permitted only minority participation by Indian companies by way of export of capital

goods rather than cash outflows in view of domestic capital and foreign exchange scarcity.

In April 1978, an Inter-Ministerial Committee in the Ministry of Commerce was set up to

clear proposals for Overseas Investments. As a part of economic reforms since 1991, policy

governing outward investments was also liberalized in 1992 when an automatic approval

system for overseas investments was introduced, and cash remittances were allowed for the

first time. The total value of investment was restricted to $2 million with a cash component

not exceeding $0.5 million in a block of 3 years. In 1995, a single window was created in

the Reserve Bank of India, a fast-track route was introduced, and investment limit was

raised from $2 million to $4 million. Beyond $4 million, approvals were considered

under Normal Route at the Special Committee level. Investment proposals in excess of

$15 million were considered by Ministry of Finance with the recommendations of the

Special Committee and generally approved if the required resources were raised through

the Global Depository Receipt (GDR) route. With the introduction of Foreign Exchange

Management Act

in 2000, the policy with respect to outward investment was overhauled

and the limit for investment was raised to $50 million. Companies were allowed to invest

100% of the proceeds of their American Depository Receipt/GDR issues for acquisitionsof foreign companies and outward direct investments. The limit was raised in March 2002

to $100 million for automatic route. In a significant liberalization of policy governing

outward investments in March 2003, government allowed Indian companies to invest

under automatic route up to 100% of their net worth. This limit was raised further to

200% of net worth in 2005, to 300% of net worth in 2007, and finally to 400% of net worth

in 2008 to facilitate large acquisitions as the foreign exchange reserves of India built up

(Gopinath, 2007). The government policy, therefore, seems to have been guided by the

relative foreign exchange scarcity in the country besides the recognition of the importance


3/21


Nagesh Kumar

2008 The Author

244


of outward investments for the overall competitiveness of Indian industry. It has three

distinct phases of evolution; namely, restrictive policy during 19781992, permissive

policy during 19922003, and liberal policy, since 2003 (Nayyar, 2007).

Recognition of the outward investments for competitiveness of enterprises has also

resulted in the creation of financing facility for outward investments by Indian companies

through the Export-Import Bank of India. The Export-Import Bank has extended term

loans to Indian companies for funding their investments in overseas affiliates ever since its

inception in the early 1980s. Currently, the banks Overseas Investment Finance program

provides financing for both equity as well as loans of Indian companies in their affiliates

abroad. Since April 2003, Indian commercial banks have also been permitted to extend

credit to Indian companies for outward investments. In November 2006, the prudential

limit on the bank financing was raised from 10% to 20% of overseas investment. From

2005, Indian firms were allowed to float special purpose vehicles in international capital

markets to finance acquisitions abroad facilitating the use of leveraged buyouts in inter-

national financial markets. Therefore, they were provided access to the expanding inter-

national capital market. While the enabling policy and access to international markets

facilitated outward investments by Indian enterprises, these cannot be adequate by them-

selves. As per the theory of international operations of firm, a firm needs ownership of

certain unique assets to be successful abroad.

1

The issue of ownership advantages, which is

central to the ability of a firm to expand abroad, is addressed in Section 4.

2.2 Trends in outward investments by Indian companies in a comparative global

perspective

Although Indian companies have been investing abroad since the early 1970s, the

magnitudes of investments were quite small until the mid-1990s when the investment

limits were raised. However, the magnitudes as well as numbers of outward investments

have suddenly swelled since 2000 to around $1.5 billion per annum. Since 20052006, the

outward investments have climbed new heights as apparent from Figure 1. In 20052006,

the magnitude of outward investment by Indian companies was nearly $5 billion and it

jumped to $ 12.8 billion in 20062007. In the first 9 months of 20072008, Indian

companies had already invested over $10 billion.

To put the magnitudes of Indian outward FDI in a global comparative perspective, a

comparison with other emerging countries would be in order. For this one has to turn to

data compiled and reported by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development

(UNCTAD) on a comparable basis. The UNCTAD figures for India, however, do not tallywith Indian data reported by Indian sources as summarized in Figure 1.

Table 1 shows that outward investments from developing countries have over time

gained in salience accounting for 14% of global outflows in 2006 compared to just 8% in

2003. The importance of key emerging economies (namely, Brazil, China, South Africa,

and India) as sources of outward FDI among developing countries has increased over the

past few years, as highlighted in the literature (Lall, 1983, Wells, 1983, Kumar, 1998, Aykut

& Ratha, 2004, UNCTAD, 2005, 2006; Goldstein, 2007; The Economist

, 2007; among others).

Their importance as sources of FDI has gone up in recent years with their combined share


4/21

Nagesh Kumar


2008 The Author


245

Figure 1 Outward foreign direct investment (FDI) by Indian enterprises, 19962008.

Note: *for AprilDecember 2007.

Source: Author based on Ministry of Finance and RBI data.

Table 1 Foreign direct investment (FDI) outflows from emerging countries ($ million)

2003 2004 2005 2006

World 560 087 877 301 837 194 1 215 789

Developed economies 503 966 745 970 706 713 1 022 711

Developing economies 45 372 117 336 115 860 174 389

Share in total (%) (8) (13) (14) (14)

South Africa 565 1 352 930 6 674

Share in developing countries (%) (1) (1) (1) (4)

Brazil 249 9 807 2 517 28 202


China 2 855 5 498 12 261 16 130


India 1 879 2 179 2 495 9 676


Total share of four emerging countries (12) (16) (16) (35)

FDI outflows as a percentage of gross fixed capital formation

World 8.4 10.1 9.2 11.8Developed countries 10.3 11.8 11.1 14.1

Developing countries 2.1 5.5 4.7 6.4

South Africa 2.9 3.9 2.3 14.1

Brazil 0.3 8.6 1.8 15.8

China 0.4 0.7 1.5 1.9

India 0.8 1.2 1.4 5

Source: Compiled from online UNCTADs FDI database and UNCTAD World Investment Reports

(2004, 2007).


5/21


Nagesh Kumar

2008 The Author

246


going up from 12% in 2003 to 16% in the next 2 years to a staggering 35% in 2006. It would

appear that 2006 has seen sharp rise in outward investments not only from India but also from

Brazil, South Africa, and China. It remains to be seen whether the increase was due to some

large acquisitions or whether it is the new scale of activity that will be sustained in the coming

years. Some of outward investments are reported as emerging from tax havens, such as the

British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands, and could be attributed to round tripping.

In terms of absolute magnitudes, the share of outward FDI from India in outflows from

developing countries at 6% compared to 9% for China is impressive considering the fact

that the Chinese economy is nearly 2.5 times that of India. Another comparison across

countries is in terms of outward FDI as a percentage of gross fixed capital formation

(GFCF) in the source economy also reported in Table 1. It suggests that the share of

outward FDI in GFCF was higher for India than China in 20032004, roughly comparable

in 2005 and again in 2006. Outward FDI/GFCF ratio for Brazil and South Africa is higher

than China and India.

The above comparisons do not reflect on the profile of international enterprises orig-

inating in India and other emerging countries. A recent study by the Boston Consulting

Group (2008) has identified 100 companies (Global Challengers) from rapidly developing

economies that are globalizing and are likely to emerge as global players. This list covers

Indian companies along with those from 13 other emerging countries and, hence, could

also be useful in putting the globalization of Indian enterprises in a comparative global

perspective. The Boston Consulting Group list is dominated by two Asian countries

(namely, China and India) with 41 and 20 companies in global 100, respectively. The next

country in the list (Brazil) has only 13 companies. According to the key characteristics of

Chinese and Indian companies summarized in Table 2, on average Indian companies are

much smaller in scale compared to their Chinese counterparts, but have a much higher

proportion of international sales at 47% compared to just 17% in case of Chinese compa-

nies. A striking difference is the fact that all the 20 Indian companies are publicly traded

Table 2 Key characteristics of Indian and Chinese globalizing companies

India China

No. of companies in Boston Consulting Group 100 20 41

Average size ($ billion) 3.9 14.5

CAGR (%) 31 26

Share of international sales (%) 47 17

Operating profit margin (%) 16 14

CAGR of total share holders return (%) 38.2 27.7

Public traded (quoted) 20 out of 20 34 out of 41

State owned None 29 out of 41

Merger and acquisition deals by sample companies 26 17

Proportion of matured markets in merger and acquisition deals 68 78

Source: Compiled from Boston Consulting Group (2008). CAGR, compound annual growth rate.


6/21

Nagesh Kumar


2008 The Author


247

companies and none of them is state owned, while 29 of the 41 Chinese companies are state

owned. A greater proportion of acquisitions (78%) by Indian companies were in devel-

oped countries compared to those by Chinese companies (68%). Therefore, the profile of

an Indian company emerges to be one of a fast-growing and rapidly internationalizing

company that is publicly traded and privately managed compared to larger state-owned

enterprises of China.

Another study suggests that the bulk of the Chinese outward FDI is concentrated in

Hong Kong (64%), Cayman Islands (15.6%), and Virgin Islands (3.5%), which may be

driven by the round tripping considerations to take advantage of tax preferences for

foreign investors prevailing in China. In terms of motivations, Chinese outward investments

are dominated by outward investments made by three state-owned oil companies (namely,

CNPC, CNOOC, and SINOPEC), which are driven by natural resource-seeking motive,

although some manufacturing companies, such as Lenovo, TCL, and Nanjing Auto, are

beginning to make acquisitions for technology and brands (Hagiwara, 2006). The

natural resource-seeking investments are outward investments but not internationaliza-

tion of operations. In Indias case, most of the outward investments are undertaken

generally by private enterprises seeking to internationalize their operations through

horizontal acquisitions and greenfield investments.

3. Emerging Patterns in Internationalization of Indian Enterprises

3.1 Changing geographies

Alongside the magnitudes, the geographical and sectoral composition of Indian outward

investments has also changed over time. Table 3 summarizes the geographical distribution

of approvals of outward FDI by the Indian government. It reveals that the outward FDI

activity of Indian enterprises in the pre-1990 period was largely concentrated in

developing countries. The share of developed countries increased to more than a third

during the 1990s, yet the bulk of the activity (63%) remained concentrated in developing

countries. However, in the new millennium the developed countries have become the new

focus of activity with nearly 54% share of approved investments. The share of developed

countries would have risen further in the past couple of years for which data is not yet

available as some of the major multibillion-dollar deals have been in the developed

countries.

3.2 Evolving sectoral composition

The sectoral distribution of outward FDI flows has also changed over time as summarized

in Table 4. It is apparent that in the pre-1990 period, the bulk of outward FDI was

concentrated in the manufacturing sector and in the services sector in a nearly two-thirds

and one-third proportion, respectively, with a negligible share of the extractive sector. In

the 1990s, the proportion changed gradually in favor of services with information

technology (IT) and related services becoming very important sector especially in the

second half of 1990s. Among the manufacturing sectors, drugs and pharmaceuticals

emerged as an important sector besides fertilizers and agrochemicals. In the first 4 years


7/21


Nagesh Kumar

2008 The Author

248


of the current decade for which data is available, the extractive sector has enhanced its

importance with more than a fifth of all approvals by value. The manufacturing sector has

regained its importance with 56% share of approved investments while the share of

services sector has gone down to nearly 23%. It would appear that internationalization of

service sector enterprises has reached its plateau and now manufacturing enterprises are

paying more attention to internationalization of their operations.

3.3 Changing entry strategies: greenfield to acquisitions

A major change has been with respect to entry modes. While greenfield investments were

the primary entry vehicles for outward FDI in the pre-1990s as well as during the 1990s,

acquisitions occupy an important place in the entry strategy in the current decade (as is

clear from Table 5). As per Table 5, Indian companies made purchases outside India of the

value of $4.74 billion. In 2007, Indian companies are reported to have spent $32.73 billion

on overseas merger-and-acquisition deals (India Brand Equity Foundation, 2008).However, large acquisitions generally involve leveraged buyouts based on capital raised in

international capital markets and are not reflected in the outward FDI figures.

In terms of the entry strategies of Indian companies, the acquisition of Tetley by Tata

Tea in 2000 for $407 million was perhaps a turning point. It was the first time that an

Indian company acquired a major industry champion in the West that was much bigger in

size than itself through leveraged buyout. The acquisition provided to Tata Tea a global

brand, worldwide marketing network, and packaging technology of Tetley. Thus, Tata Tea

could instantly combine its production bases and plantations in India and Sri Lanka

Table 3 Geographical distribution of approvals of outward foreign direct investment (FDI) from

India, 2006 ($ million)

Up to 1990 19911995 19962002 20022006

South-East and East Asia 80.79 191 703.6 1 486.46South Asia 20.91 59.11 164.53 108.21

Africa 37.83 63.02 734.36 1 569.82

West Asia 21.54 95.38 410.89 513.62

Central Asia 23.2 13.99 38.28 138.67

Central and Eastern Europe 6.56 37.31 1 750.03 1 081.9

Latin America and the Caribbean 0.58 8.36 253.18 454.18

Developing countries 191.52 468.21 4 054.91 5 352.92

Share in total (%) (86.09) (63.80) (63.33) (46.20)

Western Europe 17.29 149.4 789.52 4 084.23

North America 13.51 110.79 1 546.41 1 632.58

Developed countries 30.89 256.6 2 348.18 6 233.91

Share in total (%) (13.89) (34.97) (36.67) (53.80)

Total 222.46 733.82 6 403.09 11 586.83

Source: Research and Information System for Developing Countries database.


8/21

Nagesh Kumar


2008 The Author


249

Table 4

Sector-wise distribution of outward foreign direct investment (FDI) from India ($ million)

Pre-1990 19911995 19962000 20012004

Extractive 4.04 1.53 59.61 979.42

Share in total (%) (1.82) (0.21) (1.71) (20.86)Exploration and refining of oil 0.02 1.52 59.58 913

Exploration of minerals and precious stones 4.02 0.01 0.03 66.42

Manufacturing 145.22 406.2 1 224.96 2 647.6

Share in total (%) (65.28) (55.38) (35.19) (56.39)

Oilseeds, food products, and processing 9.06 31.94 37.38 62.08

Textiles and garments 9 44.84 67.71 27.94

Wood, pulp, and paper 11.51 0.7 17.02 1.77

Leather, shoes, and carpets 20.55 11.45 16.95 6.74

Chemicals, petrochemicals, and paints 7.82 52.95 39.17 2 114.2

Drugs and pharmaceuticals 4.72 54.48 168.1 223.32

Rubber, plastic, and tyres 2.32 2.84 82.95 25.34

Cement, glass, and building material 4.19 27.47 52.31 2.84

Metals 16.17 14.38 36.29 43.12

Electrical and electronic equipment 2.11 6.42 84.44 16.39

Automobiles and parts thereof 3.21 2.93 21.07 59.05

Gems and jewelry 0 6.25 11.59 14.62

Electronic goods and consumer durables 0.27 8.82 11.93 4.98

Beverages and tobacco 3.24 17.61 124.43 16.05

Engineering goods and industrial machines 8.53 13.35 52.86 8.33

Fertilizers, pesticides and seeds 39.93 32.87 294.09 3.68

Miscellaneous 2.59 76.89 106.68 17.15

Services 73.2 325.77 2 196.4 1 068.24

Share in total (%) (32.91) (44.41) (63.10) (22.75)

Information technology, communication,

and software

5.64 120.84 1233.54 746.46

Hotels, restaurants, and tourism 24.96 52.88 59.56 16.1

Civil contracting and engineering services 1.8 2.45 14.12 14.7

Consultancy 0.43 1.53 6.53 2.8

Trading and marketing 12.47 90.89 5.56 3.11

Media broadcasting and publishing 0.01 0.5 739.13 77.12

Financial services and leasing 26.32 37.92 57.56 125.95

Transport services 0.55 11.17 37.16 61.21Other professional services 1.05 7.6 43.08 20.79

Total 222.45 733.5 3 480.98 4 695.26

Source: Research and Information System for Developing Countries database.


9/21


Nagesh Kumar

2008 The Author

250


vertically with the front end of Tetley, giving it access to customers across the world.

Following the acquisition, Tata Tea has now emerged as the worlds second largest global

branded tea operation with product and brand presence in 40 countries and has been able

to enhance its value addition considerably by being able to sell the bulk of its tea as

tea bags.

2

The successful acquisition opened the floodgates for such acquisitions for Indian

companies trying to establish themselves as significant players in the Western markets in

value added consumer goods and services. Indian companies trying to build their niche in

the consumer goods industries in the Western markets have learned that it is an extremely

painstaking and slow process and is prone to high risks, as demonstrated by Titan Industries

experience. Titan Industries attempted to break into the stronghold of Swiss watches in the

Western European markets with products designed especially for the markets backed by a

heavy advertising and marketing effort to build a brand following. However, the effort had

rather limited success and the company had to pull out of a number of Western European

markets and consolidate its presence in a few where it had made a mark.

3

After the successful experience of TataTetley, major Indian companies with global

ambitions have increasingly employed acquisitions as an entry mode besides greenfield

entries for penetrating the overseas markets. In particular, acquisitions of companies with

regional or global footprints seemed attractive to fulfill the global ambitions of Indian

companies in an expedited manner.

4. Changing Motivations and Ownership Advantages

4.1 Market-seeking to strategic assets-seeking strategies

The changing entry strategies in favor of acquisitions partly reflects the changing

motivations for outward investments by Indian companies. Initially (during the 1970s and1980s), outward investments made by Indian companies were of a market-seeking nature

designed to exploit the revenue productivity of their scaled-down technology and capital

goods adapted to developing country situations. Hence, they were primarily concentrated

in relatively poorer countries in Asia and Africa and focused on relatively matured

technology areas of manufacturing, such as metal products, edible oil refining, paper, light

engineering, among others (Kumar, 1996).

In the 1990s, Indian enterprises emerged as important players in generic pharmaceu-

ticals and in IT software services in the global markets. As exports in these areas require a

Table 5 Cross-border merger and acquisition purchases by Indian companies, 20042006

2004 2005 2006

Acquisitions (number) 64 91 133

Value of acquisitions ($ million) 863 2 649 4 740

Source: compiled from UNCTAD (2007).


10/21

Nagesh Kumar


2008 The Author


251

local presence, outward investments were undertaken by Indian companies to support

their exports. Hence, outward FDI during the 1990s comprised generally the trade sup-

porting type. The geographical coverage began to shift in favor of developed countries,

which emerged as principal markets for Indian generic drugs and the software services.

In the current decade, the motivation for outward investment has been the globaliza-

tion of operations and increasing their scales. Indian enterprises in the course of their evo-

lution developed certain ownership advantages that could be exploited abroad. Exposed

to globalization through their export-orientation and inward FDI through liberalization

of the trade and investment regimes under structural reforms undertaken by the govern-

ment since 1991, the Indian companies began to develop global ambitions. Realizing these

ambitions through greenfield investment strategies and building brand names and other

strategic assets, such as access to marketing networks and access to customers, is a pains-

taking and slow process. Hence, acquisition of established companies with global foot-

prints appeared to be a right strategy for Indian companies. Hence, the motivation for

outward FDI during the current decade has been dominated by strategic asset seeking,

although many market-seeking greenfield investments and natural resource-seeking

investments are being made. The strategic assets include not only access to brands and cus-

tomers, but sometimes also proprietary technology. The acquisition of Thomsons CRT

business by Videocon, for instance, not only passed on to the Indian company, plants in

China, Italy, Poland, and Mexico, but also access to Thomsons technology, patents, and

research and development centers. Other motivations have included access to natural

resources such as minerals. Some acquisitions by Indian companies have been driven by a

natural resource-seeking objective. These include investments by ONGC Videsh in Russia,

Sudan, and other countries, Tata Powers investments in coal mines in Indonesia, among others

(Table 6 for a list of select acquisitions). That still leaves the question of ownership advantages

of Indian companies that enable them to successfully acquire established global companies.

4.2 Sources of ownership advantages for Indian enterprises

The theory of the international operation of the firm which has evolved over the years

with the contributions from Hymer (1976), Caves (1971), and Dunning (1979), among

many others posits that the ownership of some unique advantages having a revenue-

generating potential abroad combined with the presence of internalization and locational

advantages leads to outward FDI. Enterprises based in the industrialized countries have

emerged as multinational enterprises on the strength of ownership advantages derived

from innovatory activity that is largely concentrated in these countries. Very little is knownabout the sources of the strength of enterprises based in developing countries, such as

India, that enables overseas investment.

Frugal engineering skills or the ability to deliver value for money as an ownership advantage

It has been argued that the main source of the advantage enjoyed by Indian enterprises was

their ability to absorb, adapt, and build upon the technologies imported from abroad

rather than produce completely novel technologies. Indian enterprises have accumulated

considerable learning and technological capabilities during the first four decades of


11/21

2008TheAuthor

252

JournalCompilation

2008JapanCent

erforEconomicResearch

Table 6 Select major acquisitions by Indian companies since 2000 by motivation

Indian firm Target firm Country Indust

Strategic assets seeking

Metals and products

Tata Steel Corus Steel UK Steel

Tata Steel Ltd. Millenium Steel Plc. Thailand Steel

Tata Steel NatSteel Asia Pte. Singapore Steel

Hindalco Novelis USA Alumin

Ispat Industries Ltd. Finmetal Holdings Bulgaria Steel

Pharmaceuticals

Dr. Reddys Betapharm Arzneimittel GmbH Germany Pharm

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Terapia SA Romania Pharm

Matrix Laboratories Docpharma NV Belgium Pharm

Automobiles

Tata Motors Daewoo Commercial Vehicles South Korea Autom

Tata Motors Jaguar and Land Rover Motors UK Autom

Tata Motors Hispano Carrocera Spain Autom

Bharat Forge Federal Forge USA Autom

Fast moving consumer goods

Kraft Foods Ltd. United Biscuits UK Food a

Tata Tea Tetley Group UK Food a

Tata Tea and Tata Sons Glaceau USA Health

Tata Coffee Eight OClock Coffee Co. USA Food a

United Spirits White & Mackay UK Food a


12/21

2008TheAuthor

JournalCompilation

2008JapanCenterforEconomicResearch

253

Power generation and electronic engineering

Suzlon Energy Hasen Transmissions Belgium Wind p

Suzlon Energy Repower Systems Germany Wind p

Videocon International Thomson SA (CRT business) Europe, China,

Mexico

Electro

Opto Circuits India Ltd. Eurocor GmbH Germany MedicaInformation and communication technology

Wipro Ltd. Infocrossing USA Inform

I-Flex Solutions Mantas Inc. USA Inform

Sasken Communication Tech Ltd. Bornia Hightec Finland Inform

Tata Consultancy Services TKS Technosoft Switzerland Inform

Seagate Tech Ltd. Evault Inc. USA Inform

Citrix Software Pvt. Ltd. Sequoia Software USA Inform

VSNL Ltd. Teleglobe International

Holdings Ltd.

USA Telecom

Reliance Infocomm Flag Telecom USA Telecom

Natural resource seekingONGC Videsh Petrobras Brazil Petrole

ONGC Videsh Greater Nile Oil Project Sudan Petrole

ONGC Videsh Sakhalin-I PSA Project Russia Petrole

ONGC Videsh Greater Plutonio Project Angola Petrole

Ballarpur Industries Ltd. Sabah Forest Industries Malaysia Pulp an

Tata Power PT Bumi Resources Indonesia Coal m

Source: Author based on information from Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry,

Indian firm Target firm Country Indust


13/21


Nagesh Kumar

2008 The Author

254


independence, under the import-substituting industrialization policy pursued by the

government (Lall, 1986; Kumar, 1996, 2007a). Sometimes, these included the adaptation

of imported designs to make them appropriate for local climatic conditions and poor

infrastructure. For instance, the suspension in Indian-made vehicles was adapted for

dealing with the poor quality of roads. Some of these adaptations were also found

appropriate in other developing countries. However, a more remarkable feature of Indian

innovations has resulted from Indian enterprises evolution in a low country setting and,

hence, dealing with highly price conscious and demanding customers. As the volumes in

India lay at the bottom of the pyramid, the companies focused on innovations for

developing affordable yet functionally efficient products. Indian pharmaceutical and

chemical enterprises developed cost-effective processes of known chemical entities, helped

by the absence of product patents in India until 2005. With this capability, they began to

enter the generics market in the USA and other developed countries after the expiry of

product patents. They have emerged as the most competitive suppliers of generic

medicines and are now being invited by a number of governments in Africa and elsewhere

and international foundations to supply cheap drugs for public health programs.

4

Similarly, Indian automobile producers, in order to cater to some of the most demand-

ing customers in the world at their home base, has given to Indian companies a unique

ability to deliver value for money. Tata Motors, for instance, was not only able to design

and develop the first completely Indian car Indica in 1999, but was also able to produc-

tionize it at nearly one-third of the cost for a similar plant elsewhere. Indian companies

often make value for money a unique selling point for their products (e.g. Tata Indicas

campaign more car per car). After developing a number of highly successful products,

such as small pick-up truck Tata Ace and a sports utility vehicle Safari, Tata Motors

eventually went on to develop the worlds cheapest car priced at $2 500 in 2008 meeting

contemporary emission and safety standards, which has been recognized by the global

industry leaders as revolutionary.

5

The development of Nano, which includes 34 patents,

involved setting new benchmarks in terms of automobile design

6

and involved teams

working at research and development centers of the company located in India, the UK,

Spain, and South Korea. Another Indian auto company, Mahindra, designed and launched

a sports utility vehicle Scorpio that is considered great value for money in its class and is

sold in a number of countries in Europe, Africa, and Latin America besides in South Asia.

This unique ability of Indian companies to develop cost-effective processes, described by

Carlos Ghosn, CEO of Renault/Nissan, as the frugal engineering skills, has attracted the

attention of established multinational enterprises for increasingly sourcing their designand development activities from India. This ability gives to Indian companies the confi-

dence to turn around many production facilities in the Western world that have been ren-

dered unviable due to high production costs.

7

Accumulated learning and organizational and managerial know-how

Accumulated production experience is a source of considerable learning and absorption

of know-how. This learning is a source of incremental innovations on the shop floor that

are not captured by indicators of more formal innovatory activity. Accumulated


14/21

Nagesh Kumar


2008 The Author


255

experience also helps an enterprise acquire managerial skills, knowledge of the market and

reputation, among other advantages. These advantages can be valuable for overseas

investments especially in relatively mature and standardized industries, if not in more skill-

or knowledge-intensive ones. Indian software companies have developed global delivery

models to optimize and leverage the locational advantages of different geographies.

Long production experience in India gives to Indian companies not only the skills and

organizational capability to manage large operations, but also the experience of managing

in multicultural settings, given the cultural diversity of the country. Given the large geo-

graphical area in their home base, Indian companies learn to pursue multidomestic oper-

ations with production centers and offices spread throughout the country. With significant

cultural, linguistic, and ethnic contexts prevailing in different locations in the country,

Indian companies acquire skills that give them an edge in managing operations across

diverse locations. This managerial capability also gives them the confidence of managing

the acquired facilities besides greenfield projects. Therefore, managerial skills have

emerged as an important ownership advantage for Indian companies.

Ability to raise finance

Having operated under a system of prudential financial regulations and corporate

governance, Indian companies generally enjoy healthy balance sheets and robust credit

ratings. Most of them have been listed on Indian stock exchanges for decades and are

actively quoted. A number of them have also listed themselves at the New York Stock

Exchange and have followed Generally Accepted Accounting Principles of the USA systems

of accounting and corporate governance. Their healthy balance sheets and their proven

organizational skills have enabled them to attract the attention of international banks and

financial institutions for funding their leveraged buyout programs.

A quantitative study analyzing the determinants of the propensity to invest abroad of

Indian companies in the framework of a logit model estimated for a panel dataset of 4 200

Indian companies corroborated the above hypotheses (see Kumar, 2007a). The study

found variables capturing firm-level accumulated learning, their technological effort,

cost-effectiveness of production processes, and their ability to differentiate products

having strong favorable effects on the ability of Indian enterprises to invest abroad. The

effect of firm size on the probability of FDI outflows was also strongly favorable but with

a nonlinear inverted U-shaped. Exporting enterprises were found more likely to undertake

outward investment. The ability to export in a way already reflects international com-

petitiveness and some ownership advantages. Further analysis observed some variation inthe effectiveness of variables across technology classes; for instance, ownership advantages

were particularly effective in low and medium technology industries and cost-effectiveness

being particularly significant in low technology industries.

5. Three Phases of Evolution of Indian Enterprises

It would appear from the foregoing summary of emerging patterns in outward FDI

activity of Indian enterprises that the nature and characteristics of overseas operations of


15/21


Nagesh Kumar

2008 The Author

256


Indian companies over the past decades have undergone a considerable transformation. As

summarized in Table 7, three phases are clearly distinguishable with respect to sectors,

magnitudes, entry modes, and destinations that are arguably due to changing motivations.

In the first phase until 1990, Indian companies largely operated small operations as joint

ventures in poorer countries in Asia and Africa, seeking markets based on adapted and

scaled-down technologies in relatively low technology sectors. The entry mode was

greenfield.

With the onset of reforms with greater freedom to invest abroad, Indian companies

made outward investments in other countries to support their exports with local presence.

Hence, they began to be concentrated in developed and developing countries where the

markets for Indian products and services existed. These investments were concentrated in

select industries such as pharmaceuticals and IT software in which Indian companies

developed some cost-effective processes. The entry mode was largely greenfield. This com-

prised the Second Phase in the evolution of Indian enterprises.

The third phase in the evolution of Indian enterprises has been ushered in by the Tata

Tetley deal. It is driven by the motivation of Indian companies to acquire scale and globalfootprints. Hence, it is largely directed at acquiring strategic assets, such as brand names

(as in the case of TataTetley or White & Mackay), established marketing networks (as in

the pharmaceutical industry), or access to customers (as in the case of Novelis or Corus in

the Western world), or access to clients (as in the IT industry), or technology (as in the case

of wind turbines and gearbox technology by Suzlon, or for heavy range of trucks as in Tata

Daewoo). The scales and magnitudes involved are large and the entry mode is often acqui-

sition. These acquisitions are producing a new set of global leaders, for example, Tata Steel

becoming the fifth largest steel producer in the world after acquiring Millennium Steel,

Table 7 Evolution of Indian enterprises

First phase (pre-1990s) Second phase (1990s) Third phase (2000)

Ownership

advantages

Adapted and scaled-

down technologies

Cost-effective

processes

Managerial expertise, low-cost

production, and engineering abilityMotivations Market-seeking Trade supporting Strategic assets and natural resources

seeking

Sectors Low technology: light

engineering, palm oil

refining, rayon, paper

Information

technology services,

pharmaceuticals, etc.

Metals, pharmaceuticals, auto

Magnitudes Small Moderate Large

Entry modes Greenfield Greenfield Acquisitions and greenfield

Destinations Asian and African

low-income countries

Similar to exports Resource-rich and strategic resource-

rich/countries (e.g. UK, USA, Russia,

South Korea, Singapore, South Africa)


16/21

Nagesh Kumar


2008 The Author


257

NatSteel, and Corus; and Suzlon Energy, becoming the fifth largest producer of wind

turbines.

The phased evolution of Indian enterprises has some similarities with the

South Korean companies during 1980s through greenfield investments and acquisitions

during the 1990s to acquire scales and global footprints, or Japanese companies in the

1970s and 1980s, respectively.

8

The Indian policy of facilitating enterprise development by

restricting imports and foreign entry in the early period of its development before liberal-

ization of trade and investment regimes in 1991 is similar to that followed by Japan and

South Korea. On the other hand, China and many countries of the Association of South-

East Asian Nations (ASEAN) have pursued a policy dominated by liberal FDI involvement

in export capability development. Hence, most of the enterprises undertaking FDI in the

case of China are state-owned enterprises rather than private sector enterprises.

6. Implications for Companies and the Home Country

Acquiring large companies by raising financial resources is one thing but making them

serve the interests of stakeholders and fulfilling the objectives of the acquisition

successfully can be quite challenging. Very often integration and coordination is made

difficult by different management cultures across the enterprises involved. Many

acquisitions actually fail to deliver value to the stakeholders in a meaningful manner.

It may be too early to examine the success of the acquisitions undertaken by Indian

companies. However, most of these acquisitions fall in a pattern that involves bringing

together the low cost back end of an Indian company with a front end having an interface

with customers in rich countries. If the acquisition is able to fully exploit the synergies

in this manner without disturbing the equilibrium, the chances of success increase and

the acquisition may produce a winwin for both the acquiring and acquired companies.

Tata TeaTetley acquisition is a case study in this regard. It brought together Tata Tea, a

company owning several tea gardens in India and Sri Lanka and selling 60% of its tea in

the bulk, and Tetley with bulk tea entirely sourced from different countries but having

marketing networks and packaging plants in the USA and the UK, among other countries.

With the consolidation of the two, the combined entity derives 84% of its turnover from

selling value added tea in packet or tea bags. The proportion of outsourcing the bulk tea

from unrelated sources has come down from 100% to 70% and thus reducing the depend-

ence. It helps both the companies to hedge their margins while giving them a global

presence.TataNatSteelMillenniumCorus or HindalcoNovelis acquisitions are broadly on

the same pattern, bringing together Indian companies low-cost production bases and

their access to natural resource endowments in the home country (iron ore and bauxite,

respectively), with the access to processing technology and customers of acquired companies

has a potential to produce a winwin combination. There are some indications that such

a restructuring and production networking is taking place. Apparently, Tata Steel and NatSteel

plants in different South-East Asian countries are being covered by a scheme of regional

production network involving pallets going from India to the NatSteel plants and special


17/21


Nagesh Kumar

2008 The Author

258


steels to come from NatSteels South-East Asia plants to India. This way the synergy or the

locational advantages of India emanating from the iron ore deposits will be available to the

NatSteel plants and their specialization for some special steels to Tata Steel will be exploited

for mutual advantage. Similarly, Tata Motors after acquiring Daewoo Motors of

South Korea in 2005 has begun a regional production networking strategy involving the

smaller and medium capacity vehicles made at Indian plants and sold through Daewoo

outlets and brands while heavy trucks made at Daewoo plant sold by Tata outlets in India

and other countries under Tata brands (Kumar, 2007b). How successful Indian companies

will be able to gear up to the challenge of tapping the potential synergies and enhance

stakeholder value remains to be seen.

Some pointers are available to suggest that due care is being taken to ensure the chances

of success. For instance, Indian companies are showing due sensitivity to the concerns of

employees of acquired companies. They are also conscious of their record in terms of cor-

porate social responsibilities (CSR). One indicator of Indian companies sensitivity and

commitment to CSR is reflected in the fact that as many as 145 Indian companies have par-

ticipate in the United Nations Global Compact, the worlds largest voluntary CSR initia-

tive, compared to only 65 in Japan.

9

Tata Tea, as a part of their CSR initiative, has turned

their Munnar-based plantations to Kannan Devan Hills Tea Company owned and man-

aged by 13 000 workers of the company besides operating several schools for underprivi-

leged children. The Tata group also started professional schools in South Africa to train

people in trades. The good record of Indian companies with respect to CSR has also helped

them in their acquisition bids. For instance, the trade unions at Jaguar and Land Rover

plants supported Tata Motors bid for acquisition.

10

Indian companies are using light

touch integration seeking to exploit synergies, economies of scale, and scope rather than

hard mergers involving drastic restructuring for improving chances of success. Tata

Corus, for instance, is expecting to save $450 million a year from sharing technical ideas

and joint procurement of raw materials (

The Economic Times

, 2007).

For the home economy, too, the effect of outward FDI could be either negative or

positive. If outward FDI is able to generate enhanced competitiveness of Indian companies

and help them expand their operations, it could raise home country welfare. However, if

the outward FDI is undertaken at the cost of similar investments in the home country or

crowds out investments from it, it could have adverse consequences. Again it is premature

to judge the effects of these investments. In the 1980s, some outward investments were

made because of the existing regulations restricting the expansion of existing firms (see

Lall, 1983). However, with gradual liberalization of the domestic trade and investmentregimes and improvement in Indias investment climate as reflected in sharply rising FDI

inflows in recent years to $25 billion in 2007, outward investments taking place at the cost

of domestic investments do not appear justified. Furthermore, most of the large acquisi-

tions are funded by leveraged buyouts. Hence, these do not involve substantial capital out-

flows from India that could be at the cost of domestic investments.

There could be a number of favorable effects of outward investments for the Indian

economy resulting from exploitation of synergies, sharpening of international competi-

tiveness of Indian enterprises, remittances of profits and dividends over time provided the


18/21

Nagesh Kumar


2008 The Author


259

acquisitions are successful and are able to leverage the respective strengths of the enter-

prises concerned. In case the production networking assists in enhancing the value addi-

tion and strengthening the place of India in the international division of labor following

the acquisition, the effect of such acquisitions will be favorable. A recent study analyzing

the factors determining international competitiveness (measured in terms of export-

orientation) of Indian enterprises for a panel data for 4 200 companies, in terms of firm size,

technological activity, and foreign affiliation, among others, found a favorable effect of

outward FDI on export orientation (Kumar & Pradhan, 2007).

7. Concluding Remarks

The above discussion highlights the emergence of new corporate players on the global

scene from an emerging economy. Their evolution is striking considering their origin in a

low-income country. Their ability to acquire much larger enterprises in the developed

world reflects their confidence in managing the newly acquired entities successfully. It has

been argued that the source of their ownership or competitive advantage lies in their

accumulation of skills for managing large multilocation operations across diverse cultures

in India and in their ability to deliver value for money with their frugal engineering skills

honed up while catering to the larger part of income pyramid in India.

Considering that nearly all the Indian enterprises undertaking outward investments

had their origins in the period of import substitution-based industrialization strategy and

selective FDI policy regime, it would appear that the policy of infant industry protection

with supportive institutional framework can assist in enterprise development by giving to

them access to domestic market to grow and build capabilities. However, the protection

needs to be phased out once the capabilities are built up to expose the enterprises to inter-

national competition and sharpen their competitiveness. In fact, the reforms of 1991 have

led to a considerable restructuring of Indian industry which emerged from it leaner, more

efficient, and competitive. The exposure also gave the Indian firms global ambitions and

also the confidence to pursue them. In some ways, the Indian experience follows Jap-

anese and Korean tradition of enterprise development policies, which may have lessons for

other developing countries.

The acquisition-based strategy of internationalization adopted by Indian enterprises

in recent years by acquiring strategic assets, such as technology, known brands, access to

customers, and global footprints for jumpstarting their internationalization, is challeng-

ing as it involves managing across diverse cultures and win over the confidence of work-force to successfully exploit the synergies. Indian enterprises hope to face this challenge

with their skills in cross-cultural management honed in India, their emphasis on CSR, and

their sensitivities to workers rights from the beginning (Marsh, 2007b).

Finally, as Indian enterprises emerge as leading players in their respective industry seg-

ments, they may face some protectionist tendencies in the potential host countries, espe-

cially in the developed world. For instance, the resistance faced by an Indian firm in

challenging the established players in the watch industry in Europe, or the rejection of the

Indian Hotels Co.s recent bid by Orient-Express in the USA on the ground that Indian


19/21


Nagesh Kumar

2008 The Author

260


ownership would tarnish its premium image (Johnson, 2007). On the other hand, with

their cost-effective technologies and skills, Indian companies could find a greater acceptability

and success in other developing countries.

Notes

1 Similarly, Indian companies may have benefited from the networks of nonresident Indians living

in different countries especially with respect to information on investment opportunities. How-

ever, this will be effective only with the ownership advantages of the investing companies.

2 See Tata Tea Ltds profile in India Brand Equity Foundation (2007).

3 See Titan Industries Ltds profile in India Brand Equity Foundation (2007).

4 Indian companies were among the first to bring down the prices of basic first-line antiretroviral

regimens for the treatment of HIV/AIDS to less than $100 per year compared to $10 000 charged

by Western pharmaceutical companies in Africa. See, for more details, See Kaiser Family

Foundation.

5 See Narayan (2008).

6 Reportedly, Nanos length is 8% smaller but the inner space is 21% larger than the Suzuki-800,

the least expensive car up until that time in India. It survived a frontal crash at 48 km/hour and

was in compliance with Euro IV norms. See Business World

, January 28, 2008.

7 M.V. Kamath, the CEO of ICICI Bank (Indias largest private sector bank), has also emphasized

this by saying having learnt to serve low income consumers cost-effectively in India, ICICI Bank

is now exploring other markets. See interview with K. V. Kamath, McKinsey Quarterly

, March

31, 2007.

8 See The

Economist

, April 7, 2007. Also see Kumar (1998).

9 See www.unglobalcompact.org.

10 See interview with Roger Maddison, the National Officer (automotive industry) of the UKs

largest union, Unite, in Outlook Business

, April 19, 2008, pp. 4849.

References

Aykut D., Ratha D. (2004). South-South FDI flows: How big are they? Transnational Corporations

13

(1), 149177.

Boston Consulting Group (2008). The 2008 BCG 100 New Global Challengers

. Boston: Boston

Consulting Group.

Caves R.E. (1971). International comparisons: The industrial economics of foreign investment.

Economica

38

, 127.

Dunning J.H. (1979). Explaining changing patterns of international production: In defence of the

electric theory. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics

41

, 26996.

Goldstein A. (2007). Multinational Companies from Emerging Economies: Composition,

Conceptualization and Direction in the Global Economy

. Houndsmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan.

Gopinath S. (2007). Overseas investments by Indian companies Evolution of policy and trends,

keynote address at the International Conference on Indian Cross-border Presence/

Acquisitions; January 19, Mumbai (posted at the website of Reserve Bank of India).

Hagiwara Y. (2006). Outward investment by China gathering stream under the go global strategy.

Economic Review1 (17), Tokyo: Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ.


20/21

Nagesh Kumar Internationalization of Indian Enterprises

2008 The Author

Journal Compilation 2008 Japan Center for Economic Research 261

Hymer S.H. (1976). The International Operations of National Firms: A Study of Direct Foreign

Investment. Boston: MIT Press.

India Brand Equity Foundation (2007). Going Global: Indian Multinationals. New Delhi: IBEF.

India Brand Equity Foundation (2008). Indian investments abroad. [Cited April 14, 2008] Available

from http://www.ibef.org/economy/indianinvestmentsabroad.aspx.

Johnson J. (2007). Indias empire builder. Financial Times December 30.Kaiser Family Foundation. HIV/AIDS reporting manual, p. 63. Available from http://www.kff/

hivaids/upload/7408_02sec18.pdf.

Kumar N. (1996). India: Industrialization, liberalization and inward and outward foreign direct

investment. In: Dunning J.H., Narula R. (eds), Foreign Direct Investment and Governments.

London: Routledge, 348379.

Kumar N. (1998). Emerging outward foreign direct investment from Asian developing countries:

Prospects and implications. In: Kumar N. (ed.), Globalization, Foreign Direct Investment and

Technology Transfers. London: Routledge, 177194.

Kumar N. (2007a). Emerging TNCs: Trends, patterns and determinants of outward FDI by Indian

enterprises. Transnational Corporations16(1), 126.

Kumar N. (2007b). Regional Economic Integration, Foreign Direct Investment and Efficiency-seekingIndustrial Restructuring in Asia: The Case of India. RIS Discussion Paper no. 123, Research and

Information System for Developing Countries, New Delhi.

Kumar N., Pradhan J. (2007). Knowledge-based exports from India: Recent trends, patterns, and

implications. In: Kumar N., Joseph K.J. (eds), International Competitiveness and Knowledge-

based Industries in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 5396.

Lall R.B. (1986). Multinationals from the third world: Indian firms investing abroad. Delhi: Oxford

University Press.

Lall S. (1983). Multinationals from India. In: Lall S. (ed.), The New Multinationals: The Spread of

Third World Enterprises. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2187.

Marsh P. (2007a). Robust demand bolsters Tata-Corus. Financial TimesOctober 3.

Marsh P. (2007b). Winning hearts and minds in Holland. Financial TimesOctober 3.

Nagaraj R. (2006). Indian investments abroad: What explains the noom? Economic and Political

WeeklyXLI(46), 47164718.

Narayan D. (2008). The making of a modern classic. Business World, 28 January, pp. 3642.

Nayyar D. (2007). The internationalization of firms from India: Investment, mergers and

acquisitions. SLPTMD Working Paper Series no. 004, University of Oxford, Oxford.

Puri L. (2007). The CEO as CIO: An interview with the head of Indias top private bank,McKinsey

Quarterly, 31 March. Available from http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com.

The Economic Times(2007). Tata lays out light touch Corus integration plan. The Economic Times,

29 November, p. 7.

The Economist(2007). Globalizations offsprings. The Economist, 7 April, p. 9.UNCTAD (2004). World Investment Report 2004. New York: United Nations.

UNCTAD (2005). Internationalization of Developing Country Enterprises through Outward Foreign

Direct Investment. Issues Note by the UNCTAD Secretariat, TD/B/COM.3/EM.262/2.

UNCTAD (2006). World Investment Report 2006, FDI from Developing and Transition Economies:

Implications for Development. New York: United Nations.

UNCTAD (2007). World Investment Report 2007. New York: United Nations.

Wells L.T. (1983). Third World Multinationals-The Rise of Foreign Investment from Developing

Countries. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
http://www.ibef.org/economy/indianinvestmentsabroad.aspxhttp://www.kff/hivaids/upload/7408_02sec18.pdfhttp://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/http://www.kff/hivaids/upload/7408_02sec18.pdfhttp://www.ibef.org/economy/indianinvestmentsabroad.aspx


21/21

Nagesh Internationalization of Indian Enterprises

Documents

Transcript of Nagesh Internationalization of Indian Enterprises